although still available, is no longer under development. It's replacement package is called KompoZer, which shares much of the same source code as NVU, but had been updated to current coding standards.
I have concerns about the wording of requirement 9.a. It gives the impression that it is always wrong to give or receive a copy of a computer program that is protected by copyright.
This is not necessarily true; nearly all open-source software programs are protected by copyright, and they encourage redistribution (i.e. giving copies to friends). For example, not only is it not illegal for me to make a copy of OpenOffice.org and give it to a friend, it would be encouraged by OpenOffice.org and Sun Microsystems (the copyright holder).
The requirement should be that scouts should not accept free copies of copyrighted software if redistribution is restricted. Are others simply adhering strictly to the requirement or going further and explaining it correctly to scouts? --Mryan 20:03, February 6, 2008 (EST)
I respectfully disagree. There are various types of copyrights and terms-of-usage. OpenOffice is licensed under GPL (Gnu Public License) and other packages fall unders Apache or Mozilla Public Licese agreements, etc. Open source projects are hence deliberately not covered by conventional copyrights precisely in order to acoid this conflict and make this specific distiction.